The five Tests India and England played in the summer of 2025 went the entire distance. Every match reached the fifth day. The series finished 2-2, with one draw, and three of the five results were decided by margins under 25 runs. Across the five matches, twenty-five days of cricket were played, and on every one of those days a result remained possible into the final session.

Nobody who watched that series will forget it. That is partly the cricket. It is also the format doing what the format is supposed to do.

Test matches that end in three days disappear from memory the moment the next series begins. The Tests that get etched into our memories are the ones that go five days. They finish in the final session and reward whichever side fought and persevered the most. India-England 2025 was watched because it was 2-2 across twenty-five days. The matches that go three days and 280 overs do not get watched the same way. They do not produce the moments cricket lives on.

This is not nostalgia. It is the architecture of the format.

Five days

No other team sport in the world asks its athletes to play across five continuous days. The format is unique not because it is long, but because the conditions change while you are playing them.

The red ball’s lifecycle dictates the Test match. It begins with the seamers’ dominance, transitions into a mid-innings containment phase as the ball softens, and resets with the second new ball at 80 overs. Factor in the onset of reverse swing and a pitch that evolves daily, and the format becomes four or five distinct games stitched together. All played by the same eleven people.

The weather rotates inside each day. Morning cloud assists swing, afternoon sun bakes the pitch and flattens it and late evening light brings the seamers back. Across five days, the team that bats and bowls in the session under helpful conditions can drive significant advantages that turn a stalemate into a decisive victory.

Across a series, bowlers fatigue. A fast bowler in the third Test of a tour has lost a yard. A spinner who bowled 60 overs in Test 1 has blisters by Test 2. Bodies break. The team that has driven the opposition’s fast bowlers into the ground by the second Test has often already won the third.

This is the variance canvas Test cricket plays across. Football is ninety minutes with substitutes. Basketball is forty-eight minutes with rotations. Baseball is nine innings with fresh pitchers. Only Test cricket asks its athletes to play continuously across five days, against changing conditions, with the same eleven people on either side

Test cricket is all about understanding when to attack and defend. It is the art of recognizing which sessions are for accumulating runs and which are for protecting the foundation, knowing that a single reckless hour can undo four days of patient, unglamorous labor.

The attritional cricketer

The attritional cricketer’s job description, properly written, would read: make the bowlers tired, make the ball old, make the pitch deteriorate, make the opposition’s plans degrade and survive long enough that someone else can convert all of this into runs.

They are not slow because they cannot score. They are slow because they are executing their role. A fast bowler bowling six balls at them for no runs has used six deliveries of his finite reserve. By the time the attritional cricketer has played out fifteen overs and the fast bowler is gone then the captain is bowling his fourth-choice option. By the time he has played out thirty, the second new ball is being taken against batters who have settled. By the time he has played out fifty, the pitch beneath him is no longer the pitch the openers walked out onto.

Pujara in Australia in 2018-19 is the modern apex of this archetype. Across four Tests he faced 1,259 balls which is 28.8% of every legal delivery India faced in the series. He played 999 dot balls. He averaged 74. The bowling unit he absorbed comprised of Cummins, Hazlewood, Starc and Lyon. They bowled 678 overs across that series as a group which is the heaviest workload they ever endured in any consecutive four-Test stretch of their careers. They would play 35 Tests together over seven years and win in every condition on earth. They never had to bowl more than they did at Pujara’s India.

Two years later, on the fifth morning at the Gabba with India chasing 328, he did it again. 56 off 211 balls. Five runs off Josh Hazlewood across forty-eight deliveries. Eleven blows to the body. While he endured, Shubman Gill made 91 and Rishabh Pant made 89 not out. Pant was named Man of the Match. India won the series.

He is the apex case of the recent times.

Alastair Cook in India in 2012-13 made 562 runs across four Tests at average 93.7 and strike rate 43.7, facing 1,285 balls against Pragyan Ojha and Ravichandran Ashwin on Indian pitches. England won 2-1. It was the first time England had won a Test series in India since 1985.

Usman Khawaja in Pakistan in March 2022 faced 995 balls across three Tests on subcontinental pitches at strike rate 49.8. Australia drew that series in Pakistan, the first time they had toured there in 24 years.

These players win nothing on their own. They are not the leading lights of their teams. They do not get the Man of the Match awards.

What the format rewards

It is tempting to read the modern era as the death of attritional cricket. Test averages have drifted down, strike rates have climbed up, and conventional wisdom says you cannot afford a player who scores at 45 SR in a format that now scores at 55 SR. The data partly supports this. Among top-7 batters in the modern era, those striking below 45 average just 31. The sweet spot is between 55 SR and 60 SR, where averages climb above 40.

But this reading is too quick. What modern cricket killed is pure attrition and not competent attrition. Batmen scoring at 42-48 SR while averaging above 40. Cook. Khawaja. Pujara. Azhar. Dravid. Rahul.

These players are now scarce, and their scarcity is visible in the touring data. When a touring side has a slow anchor who performs, their loss rate on tour is 49%. When the anchor fails, the loss rate climbs to 66%. The attritional cricketer is not in the business of generating wins. They are in the business of preventing collapses.

The fact that England phased out Cook with no successor is the cautionary tale. Their home win rate under Bazball is 65%. Their away record is 43%. They have not won an Ashes series in any form since the doctrine was adopted. They lost 1-4 in India in 2024. The team that most aggressively rejected the attritional role at home is the team paying for it abroad.

The test matches we remember

India played five Tests in England in the summer of 2025. KL Rahul opened, made 532 runs at average 44 and strike rate 47.6, faced 741 balls across nine innings. He did not win the series. He prevented the series from being lost. Twenty-five days of cricket. Nobody who watched it will forget it.

That is the format showing what it is for. The matches that get etched into cricket’s memory are the ones where attrition has worked from both ends and where both teams have someone willing to do the long, unglamorous work. Persevering for their side. Making sure the result is uncertain into the last session of the last day, where the bowlers running in have already bowled fifty overs in the match and are running in anyway because that is what Test cricket asks of them.

The three-day Tests do not produce these moments. A side bowled out for 180 on Day 1 and rolled again on Day 3 does not produce the cricket that gets remembered. What gets remembered is the partnership at 4 for 2 on Day 4 that survives into the evening session. The bowler in his 15th over of the inning finally finding reverse swing. The chase that goes deep into Day 5 with the result unresolved until the last session.

Every one of these moments has, somewhere in its construction, an attritional cricketer.

Cheteshwar Pujara took eleven blows to the body at the Gabba and did not flinch once. It was the last Test innings he ever played on Australian soil.

He was one of four in last 15 years. Dean Elgar opened for South Africa for a decade as the team’s anchor. Dimuth Karunaratne did the same job for Sri Lanka. Azhar Ali averaged forty-three at strike rate forty-two across a hundred Tests for Pakistan. They all played the same game Pujara played, and they all did it in the wrong era to be celebrated for it.

In any decade before this one, these four men would have had their flowers. Books, biographies, places in their countries’ cricketing pantheons assumed rather than contested. Instead they played their cricket inside the T20 era’s flamboyant power hitting. Their lineage was unmistakable. They came from the same school as Dravid, Boycott, Gavaskar, Atherton but the cricket conversation had moved on and the words it used for them were slow, defensive, dated.

The last attritional cricketer to receive his full due was Shivnarine Chanderpaul. He retired in 2015 with 11,867 Test runs at an average of 51.37, the seventh-highest run-getter in the history of the format. He was inducted into the ICC Hall of Fame in 2022. In my reckoning, he’s the last man of his school to walk off to the kind of applause his predecessors got. Celebrated in the same lineage as Tendulkar, Ponting, Kallis, Dravid, Sangakkara and Lara.

The role itself has not died. KL Rahul does it for India. Usman Khawaja did it for Australia. However, it seems like a dying art. The attritional cricketers make the match worth winning. No test team can be successful touring away without them. You can’t produce them without playing them at home.

The format will keep asking for them. The recognition, it seems, will not keep coming. The least we can do is notice.

---

Numbers in this piece are computed from Cricsheet ball-by-ball Test data, 2010-2025. “Slow anchor” is defined as a top-7 batter who faced at least 100 balls across a tour at a strike rate below 50; “performed” means the anchor averaged 35 or higher on the tour, “failed” means below 30. See the Methods & Sources page for the full methodology.